Your Letters

Related Media

I feel compelled to respond to Hal Sundin's article of Jan. 3. It is easy to succumb to strong emotions when we are faced with heartbreaking stories like the recent shootings. However, if we are able to put our emotions aside and look at the facts, we will find that there are common things far more dangerous than high capacity repeating firearms.

First, I would like to address the Second Amendment. The founders of our nation specifically included the Second Amendment in the Constitution so that the people could defend themselves from an oppressive, tyrannical form of government. In their time, the people were the militia and those muzzle-loading weapons Mr. Sundin writes of were the assault rifles of today.

We certainly do not need violence, and I do not condone such actions. However, a population demanding its rights while armed is more likely to be heard. If we as a people yield to our emotions and forget our rights, we step onto a very slippery slope. It starts with banning high capacity magazines, then handguns, then repeating actions, and on down the line.

Have we forgotten what happened when Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao disarmed their people? That would never happen here, right?

Moving on, here are some death statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau 2007, the most recent available. These are the causes of and associated number of deaths: non-transport accidents, 76,862; motor vehicle, 43,945; drug-induced, 38,371; alcohol-induced, 23,199; falls, 22,631; firearms, 12,632; and medical errors, 195,000. (Source: HealthGrades Patient Study 2002)

Emotions aside, if we want to save lives, what should we be concerned about? A person in the U.S. is far more likely to fall to their death than be shot with a firearm. Should we restrict bipedal movement to 10 paces or less? According to the HealthGrades study, the institutions providing health care are many times more likely to kill us than guns are. Please, look at the facts and be honest with yourself.

Nicholas Krick

New Castle

To all Obama voters, I just want to say, don't acts so surprised at these new tax increases and smaller paychecks. This is what you voted for.

We Romney voters told you this would happen. We told you. Taxes were not just going to go up on the wealthiest of Americans. It would be across the board and the middle class would get hit the hardest.

How do the youth plan to pay off their student loans with smaller paychecks? I hope that free birth control that women just had to have will make up for their lost wages that they need to feed their family.

Congratulations Obama voters, you won. Now enjoy the dwindling paychecks we told you about.

Incomes between $50,000 and $200,000 will pay higher taxes. These households are facing higher taxes, an average of $1,635. The tax burden will raise more for someone making $30,000 annually (1.7 percent) than it does for someone earning $500,000 annually (1.3 percent).

Jolene Varley

Carbondale

As a constituent of Garfield County, I was shocked to learn that two county commissioners chose to single out only Planned Parenthood to deny grant funding, giving a reason that was clearly not true. Otherwise they would have denied the request by a Catholic organization, whose parent church is known to be quite wealthy.

Unlike these men, I think it is important to support women, so I went directly to Planned Parenthood and made a large donation. I very much appreciate that, nationwide, Planned Parenthood provides 5 million women (and men) per year with medical exams, advice, and treatment, in addition to birth control (which reduces abortions, by the way), and pre-natal care (which reduces the incidence of infant and maternal mortality, of course).

Only 3 percent are abortion services, and 76 percent of their clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

I made my donation in the name of my grandmother, Clara Bell Duvall, whom I never met. She died in 1929 at the age of 33 of a botched abortion. She left behind a son and four daughters. My mother became the mother of her siblings at the age of 10.

How desperate must a mother of five children be to insert a knitting needle into (and through) her uterus? That's just one of many deadly methods women used when abortion was illegal. They also used bicycle spokes, umbrella spokes, deadly chemicals and toxic herbs. Think about it.

Through the 1950s and '60s, Philadelphia General Hospital had a ward of 32 beds just for women trying to survive botched abortions. Some people want to go back to that.

Personally, I believe we need to eliminate the reasons why some women feel the need to have abortions because I don't like abortions either. The way women, in general, have been treated throughout history is tragic. All too often, it has literally been criminal. If you want to learn about what happens when abortions are illegal, check out www.watchmotherless.org.

Roxana Duvall

Carbondale

I read John Burg's My Side of Jan. 7 with great interest and appreciation. His focus and highlighting of the need for better planning and analysis of impacts on local business, pedestrian and independent access are indeed the topmost priorities in developing alternatives.

Accessibility by all is the key concept which the contractor should have, but did not apply when doing the analysis and planning. CDOT should have shepherded its contractor more closely to ensure that traffic management and control elements of each alternative recognized and protected the needs of the full range of users.

We have invested public and private funding and initiative in making Glenwood Springs and its near environs both a destination recreation and sports resort as well a fine place to live and work. Let's make sure that we make decisions regarding the bridge and Highway 82 that serves the needs and services of our expanded community.